Members

Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

That's a sizable In-roads into Nvidias data centre market. The Improved yields from the increased production of Vega/HBM2 alone is massive.
Vega is a baseline, but those server blade GPU's will inevitably be swapped with the console Navi.

Video Streaming, Youtube, Netflix were hard to imagine from a feasability standpoint 20 years ago.

Click to expand...

They really weren't.

Also, playing a video game that requires player input and if Multiplayer server response is totally the same experience and use-case as watching a video that can be even 5 minutes behind and nobody would notice.

I'll just repeat that I've tried a streaming service just like this one and had no issues. On a decently fast and stable internet connection, none but the twitchiest of games will be annoying to play. You're welcome to think I'm lying, but why would I? I don't want this if it doesn't work right. Maybe it'll be different when everybody's streaming their games, in which case I'll change my mind. Right now, though, it works.

I'll just repeat that I've tried a streaming service just like this one and had no issues. On a decently fast and stable internet connection, none but the twitchiest of games will be annoying to play. You're welcome to think I'm lying, but why would I? I don't want this if it doesn't work right. Maybe it'll be different when everybody's streaming their games, in which case I'll change my mind. Right now, though, it works.

Click to expand...

My nieces and nephews play fucking roblox mate, even shite like this is overkill.
I haven't tried it and never will. But I'm not the market.

I bet the average console pleb is hooked up to a piece of shit flat panel in out of the box torch mode with 120ms of latency.

The average gaming pc is barely any better, an off the shelf turd running a 1060 if they're lucky and connected to a TN display. What do they care about "Quality"?

Incoming design papers on how to build your action game around 100ms input delay. There will be beautiful ideas like limiting turn speed so the game feels more realistic or using longer animations for basic actions (think witcher 3 movement start/stop). Maybe they'll come with impressive innovations like triggering bullet time whenever an enemy shoots you from behind, or making the enemies alert you, wait 2s, then prepare to shoot.

Now that I've seen the announcement, I'm incredibly disappointed. I expected Google to maybe launch something similar to Steam or GoG, but with their spin on it. A bit of pressure on online stores so that they compete with each other even more would have been a good thing. That could've been interesting, but no... another streaming service. The people designing these things are somehow out of touch with gaming despite working in the game industry. Who asked for this really, what audience?

There is already a "streaming" service for low-spec games, flash games. They've been here for many years. Sure, they're popular, but no one takes them seriously. It's just something to kill time, like mobile games. You don't invest a lot of emotion or time in a streamed game because you know you don't really own it and it may not be available tomorrow. It's just not the same as owning a product, even a digital product because you can make copies of that. Knowing that you can have an offline backup of your things just makes you a bit happier.

Google Stadia is pretty much the same thing, online flash games but for AAA games. This may help Google get their money faster but at the cost of making the consumer feel disconnected from the product itself. I expect Stadia to be useful in some cases, and it will work for some type of games, but I don't think legendary games will ever be a streamed product only. And not only that, but it's a bad idea to trust a single company with all your data. People can be corrupt, businesses fail.

TBH I'm hoping they have a Google Stadia store where you can buy games and then decide to 1) play them offline using your own specs or 2) stream the game using Google's cloud.
Would be a nice alternative to Steam because unlike Epic it would actually bring something new and interesting to the table.

I played the entirety of Bloodborne on PSnow (this is my profile created for psnow, only one game really played to completion and that's BB). And PSnow is much worse than GeForce Now in my experience (gfnow stream quality is far more consistent. I'm in their beta.) and I expect google to be at least on the level of GFnow, if not better.
People who think the idea has no future are extremely shortsighted. OnLive was to game streaming what early Windows Mobile and Nokia Communicators were to smartphones. Almost nobody gave a shit about pocket PCs for aeons but when android and iOS came out it took over the world.
Yes, competitive fighting games and FPSes are not going to be best played on a streaming service.. so what? Do you actually believe the platform needs to be optimal with every single genre of video game to become successful? I guess Nintendo can stop selling 3DSes

Besides being at the right place at the right time (like how this sort of thing couldn't work before enough people in the world get good internet like fiber), another factor that will determine success and who gets to rule this newly built market is marketing and Google is doing something that may kill every single alternative to the service before they were even officially launched : they are integrating the service with youtube to the point where you can access a game demo and play it immediately right after watching a trailer on youtube. This is borderline criminal and should be watched over by regulatory authorities that are supposed to prevent abuse of monopoly power.
I'm mildly enthusiastic about the future of the technology, but I do NOT want Google to win this. I'd much prefer if it was NVIDIA who launched and won the market first.
Also, NVIDIA's plans for their services are the most honest. You'd buy and own your games, and would be able to play them on a gaming PC locally. Their service doesn't sell games, you buy them on steam like you'd usually do. Their service can run a full steam session.

All the negative posts here are like the first slashdot announcement of the iPhone.

"Mike Elgan at Computerworld lists six reasons why it was a mistake to make the iPhone keynote at Macworld. He argues that extremely high expectations can only lead to disappointment for consumers and investors. The focus on the phone during the keynote also took away from the Apple TV announcement, put iPod sales at risk, gave competitors a head start, and (perhaps worst of all) ruined the company's talks with Cisco over the iPhone name. From the article: 'The iPhone, despite its many media-oriented virtues and its sweet design, will do far less than most existing smart phones. The problem Apple now faces because of Jobs' premature detail-oriented announcement is that of dashed expectations. When customers expect more and don't get it, they become dissatisfied.'"

Click to expand...

When people have a wishful thinking to kill a technology or a product they will always argue about the impossibility of success despite the lack of reasoning.

The main reason that this will fail is because nobody asked for this, the use-case for Streaming video on demand as opposed to having to watch Live TV or buying Blu-Ray seems obvious, people are generally fine with buying their PC and console games and playing them though.

Another thing that they will never get over with this "technology" is shitty input lag:

Which makes this a non-starter for any type of competitive Multiplayer games, if it works at all. And the publishers running the servers and games wouldn't want Google to run em in the first place, since they want people to use their own services and give them money.

Another thing is developers (and even some publishers) will most likely not like their payment model, you can especially already hear Walking Sim or short "story" game devs complain, but it's generally a stupid business model even for large publishers that won't want to replace $60 retail purchases for a few bucks of Streaming hours split up on them (and the hardware and bandwidth doesn't come cheap either, and don't forget the provider's cut):

And another reason why this won't be anywhere a few years from now is that they're half-assing it, just like some of the products that were brought up before e.g. Glass/Cardboard/Daydream Google is not a game development company and has no own development studios or large infrastructure to entice people to actually use their service:

Nobody will Subscribe to some Google service to Stream AssCreed or DOOM, which they likely already own.

If anything, people should be more afraid of Microsoft trying something abysmally stupid again with their next "console cycle".

If anything, people should be more afraid of Microsoft trying something abysmally stupid again with their next "console cycle".

Click to expand...

I'm fine with them trying the abysmally stupid again as long it hurts them again. Consistent results for consistent mistakes. Quit touching the stovetop if it's burning your hand. You should have learned the first time.